Dominionist Hoedown in Salt Lake City and YOU ain’t Invited

[NOTE: Because it just might make you read it, longtime newsman Doug Krile lists this in today’s Krile Files as “The Best Story of the Night: Oh, my. There’s enough intrigue here to keep anybody interesting. Follow the twists and turns and be prepared to be surprised!“]

What’s a “dominionist”?

It’s important that you ask that question first, or else you’ll have no way of analyzing what’s going on. According to Wikipedia:

Range of Dominionist ideas

Francis Schaeffer is sometimes called one of the founders of the Christian Right movement, which some have labeled a Dominionist movement. There is controversy regarding the link between Schaeffer’s teaching and Dominion Theology, a tendency shaped primarily by theologian Rousas John Rushdoony.

Rushdoony was the intellectual founder of Christian Reconstructionism, a postmillennialist form of Theocratic Dominion Theology. Schaeffer and Rushdoony read each others’ writings, and even met. Most mainstream Christians reject Rushdoony’s views and other forms of Dominion theology as quite radical.[6] Schaeffer led a study of Rushdoony’s writings at Schaeffer’s institute in Switzerland. Schaeffer and other premillennialists picked up themes of dominionism from the postmillennialist Rushdoony, and adapted them to premillennial theology.

According to Rushdoony, the idea of dominion drawn from Genesis implied a form of Christian theocracy or, more accurately, a theonomy. For example, he wrote that:

The purpose of Christ’s coming was in terms of the creation mandate. . . . The redeemed are called to the original purpose of man, to exercise dominion under God, to be covenant-keepers, and to fulfil “the righteousness of the law” (Rom. 8:4). . . . Man is summoned to create the society God requires.[18]

Question: What do a pamphlet entitled “Slavery As It Was,” the Christian Reconstruction Movement, David Duke, Haley Barbour, Stonewall Jackson’s biographer, John Ashcroft, the League of the South, Moscow, Idaho, and homeschooling have in common? More than you might think.

I noted:

But, the Cary School turns out to be one of the over 135 schools nationally that have been “accredited” through Moscow, Idaho pastor Douglas Wilson’s “New Saint Andrews” scheme. But that’s only the tip of the iceberg. Far greater are the numbers of “home schoolers” who are regular recipients of Wilson’s educational program and publications — a scheme and movement that traces its roots to Stonewall Jackson’s chaplain and biographer, southern apologist and “theologian” R.L. Dabney, and R.J. Rushdoony — founder of Christian Reconstruction — the founder of the modern home schooling movement.

And here’s the impact:

The Christian Reconstruction Movement, which shares features and goals with the Christian Identity movement claims to be apolitical: “We are postmillennialists and believe that in the long term the majority of society will be saved or will at least outwardly conform to God’s Law. Therefore, our goal is not to capture the political realm, but to work for regeneration of individuals and families at the local level and to reform the church by teaching correct doctrine especially in the area of biblical law. A brief perusal of Reconstructionist books will prove that this is the case. A few deal with civil politics. Most deal with families, the church and Christian education. Most of the early materials for home schooling children were written by Reconstructionists,” writes Reconstructionist Jay Rogers.

The correct reason for home schooling is not simply the quality of education in the government run school system. It is to say that the government has no authority whatever over your children., You are the one who is ultimately responsible.

OK. So who’s this “dominionist” gaggle that’s having a hoedown, and where’s the hoedown?

Founded in 1981 by Tim LaHaye, the co-author of the popular post-apocalyptic Christian-themed Left Behind books, the group holds confidential meetings three times a year attended by a small but powerful cadre of top conservatives.

“The media should not know when or where we meet or who takes part in our programs, before of after a meeting,” one of the group’s rules reads, according to a New York Times profile of the organization in 2004.

“The membership list is ‘strictly confidential,” said the Times. “Guests may attend ‘only with the unanimous approval of the executive committee’.”

But WHO the heck are we talking about?

Here’s the lead from Raw Story:

Cheney to address top secret conservative policy group

An ultra-secret conservative group — so secret that members don’t even use the group’s name in communications — will feature Vice President Dick Cheney as a speaker at a meeting in Utah today.

“Cheney will address the fall meeting of the Council for National Policy, a group whose self-described mission is to promote ‘a free-enterprise system, a strong national defense and support for traditional Western values,” according to the Salt Lake City Tribune.

Deseret News editor’s speech raises questionsCannon says he’s going to the closed conference as a journalist, but that he won’t write about it
By Glen Warchol, The Salt Lake Tribune
Article Last Updated: 09/29/2007 01:58:22 AM MDT

Vice president Dick Cheney won’t be the only headliner speaking to a secretive conservative policy conclave this weekend.

The editor of the Deseret Morning News, former Republican state chairman Joe Cannon, is also on the marquee at the influential Council for National Policy.

Though Cannon is a former lobbyist and brother of Congressman Chris Cannon, his attendance in his new role as a journalist at the meeting closed to news media sends up red flags, ethicists say.

That Cannon promised council leaders he would not write about what was discussed should alarm his readers because he is shifting his loyalty from them to powerful government insiders, says Kelly McBride of the Poynter Institute, a nonpartisan journalism think tank.

“To have an editor agree to that [confidentiality] sends a really bad message that [journalists] are willing to play by their terms,” McBride says ….

The event was closed to news media, but Utah Lt. Gov. Gary Herbert said the vice president’s speech was given to a “very friendly audience” of maybe 300 to 400 people.

One presumes that the reporter isn’t on speaking terms with HER editor, and so, didn’t know that a member of the news media was in attendance … or, perhaps she realizes that maybe the editor’s astonishingly split loyalties make it hard to characterize him as “news media.”

Now, I told you about the huge amounts of cash being slushed around the country to fund “school choice” and “school voucher” politicians and initiatives on Friday (“Disneyland Democracy”). Bear that in mind as we come to some of the agenda of the “Council for National Policy.” The NOT-Church-owned Salt Lake City Tribune was able to get ahold of some of the agenda and publish it (kudos to Robert Gehrkeon his reporting (it’s what reporters USED to do, back in the days when they had actual moxie):

Two sessions are also dedicated to Utah’s voucher referendum, featuring Doug Holmes, chairman of Parents for Choice in Education, and Lyall Swim, director of operations for the Sutherland Institute.

So, what does it all mean? And how long before some clever comment is made about “tin foil hats”? I don’t know. It’s in your mental lap now. Knock it out of the ballpark.

But here’s a quote that might help you, while you’re figuring it out:

QUOTE: “Our late friend Murray Rothbard used to point out to those who scoffed at ‘conspiracy theories’ that history is indeed full of real conspiracies, and that often conspiracy provides a more satisfactory explanation for an event than the “lone nut theory” that is popular with government spokespersons.

But still, “Darth Vader” AND “Dr. Evil”? speaking to a gaggle of hyper-secretive Dominionists in Salt Lake City, Utah? No Theocracies here. Nosirree. Must have been one HELL of a hoedown.

Whomever the actual hoes ended up being.

(Endnote: A BIG tip of the HW Hat to Darrell P.)

Courage.

=========
UPDATE 10:25 AM PDT — FURTHER READING:

Here are some links for further reading:

From Google News:

Shame on Cheney
Salt Lake Tribune, United States – 6 hours ago
It was with dismay that I read that Dick Cheney will be in
Utah once again (Tribune, Sept. 26). His speech to the Council for National Policy, …

About Hart Williams

Mr. Williams grew up in Wyoming, Nebraska, Kansas and New Mexico. He lived in Hollywood, California for many years. He has been published in The Washington Post, The Kansas City Star, The Santa Fe Sun, The Los Angeles Free Press, Oui Magazine, New West, and many, many more. A published novelist and a filmed screenwriter, Mr. Williams eschews the decadence of Hollywood for the simple, wholesome goodness of the plain, honest people of the land. He enjoys Luis Buñuel documentaries immensely.

9 Responses to Dominionist Hoedown in Salt Lake City and YOU ain’t Invited

I just keep replaying that article featured here a while back about the writer who booked the radical right cruise. A fly on the wall of the ballroom of the Grand America Hotel (owner Earl Holding, Little America hotels, Sun Valley Resort, Sinclair Oil – member CNP?) must have heard many of the same real life views expressed on the cruise. A lovely bunch of people to have back out of town, but I’d sure like to know that someone has them under a microscope.

In America today, people who form conspiracies from this high up and the right end of the political spectrum are encouraged, rather than discouraged. If they had been from the left, you know that they would be infiltrated.

Thanks for the mention! I was sincere; it’s a great piece of work that points out something that hasn’t received much attention. I don’t have time to create as much original work, but I try to assemble a broad-based collection of interesting pieces each day. Thanks again for stopping by and giving me a mention!

Read Kingdom Coming” for the whole story in sick detail and sickening well-funded effort. Michelle Goldberg is the author and spent 3 years asking questions. It is a stunning work. It’s just now out in paperback. Truly a must read.

The other term used, and I’ve heard it more often is “Christian Nationalist’. The Dominionist philosophy underlies “Christian Nationalism”.

There have been over 3,000 already hired into the Admin as long-term lower and mid level professional designed to rise in ranks over the years.

Doug: No. I should be thanking you. I very much appreciate your kind words.

Stuart: Thanks for the information, I’ve gone to Amazon dot com and the paperback should be arriving in a couple of days. This whole movement goes a lot deeper and a lot stranger than anyone is willing to talk about, and that kind of “politeness” is tantamount to appeasement (some would argue ‘treason’).

The “Dominionist” movement has been successful in direct proportion to their ability to remain in the “shadows.”

Like their openly secret conclave in Salt Lake City.

They know (even if the ‘polite’ commentators don’t) that they’d be out in a New York minute if their real agenda and intentions were known.

The Second American Constitutional Convention would send all of their plans to the trash heap of history, but it probably takes the kind of money they have to pull it off.

On the up side, if they had the potential for the kind of popular support that it would take to work in the open they would just put all of this cloak and dagger shit aside and let the people decide. So what scares them is exactly the fact that they can win a fair fight.

A constitutional convention is EXACTLY what they want…they would stack the floor with their aggressive tactics and flood the organization.

If we want open the doors to the death of America as we know it…just have a constitutional convention that would allow changes to the basic framework of the Constitution. The wackjobs are GOOD at stacking organizations etc.

Stuart: I became pro CC in 1983, and have never heard a good argument against it. Your concern is what the final work product would consist of, but nothing could become final without being ratified. If the right could buy ratification, they could buy convening of the Convention, which means they don’t want a CC or it would already have happened.

Clearly the right does not want us to have an improved framework of governance, and that is why they fear a CC. Rather than gaining dominance of everything, they would lose the money they have paid to date to skew the current system in their favor. On an issue by issue basis, there is almost nothing that the right favors that the people also want.

They are good at buying politicians and controling the routine matters of government that way. They are also good at buying judges, and removing the remaining parts of the current Constitution that irk them. Until we change the game, we keep losing the game.

Search

Fair Use

The Democratic Daily encourages Fair Use of all "copyrighted" materials. All rights are reserved to the individual contributors of The Democratic Daily. Please contact each individual author for details.